Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The UK's inflation rate surged to 0.6% in December from 0.3% in November despite Covid curbs. View the full article
    • Fears had grown over the Alibaba founder's whereabouts because of pressure from Chinese authorities. View the full article
    • I felt outmatched to be honest. Lowell probably did identify me on here and decided to send one of their more experienced. The guy they sent to last hearing didn't sound half as competent. The solicitor and judge were pretty much talking amongst themselves. That's how it felt. The Judge understood and accepted what the solicitor said at every point. She accepted fresh start as a brand name only. She accepted all the evidence were copies. She accepted I entered into a valid agreement. She accepted the error on the default notice was a typo. Felt like I lost before the hearing. If not, I wasn't able to express my points well enough. Not like the claimant who I'm sure was giving a law lesson. Completely out of my depth. I didn't ask to appeal. I'm upset understandably but grateful for all the help and support I received here. I've learnt a hell of lot but hope to never need it again.
    • FAW counts Red Flag limousines, used by China's communist party leaders, among its products. View the full article
    • Thanks for your reply...much appreciated. Last payment date was December 2018. She had been paying £50/month from July, and they wanted £150/month, despite my partner losing her PIP (which was eventually reinstated after appeal). She stopped paying anything after they failed to supply a true copy of the original CCA (which she took out in 1981). Her name and address were different in 1981 due to marriage (and subsequent divorce!). Again, no mention of that in the “reconstituted” agreement which they supplied. Once again, many thanks and we both appreciate you putting time in to helping with this, especially due to the increased financial pressures of Covid on many people who also need your help.
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Article 61 (Lawful Rebellion) common Law


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3929 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

I was wondering if anyone knows if this law applies in Scotland and if so does this mean that i can refuse to pay any tax,fine,and any other forms of monies to support and or benefit said unlawful governance of this country? under article 61 of Magna Carta 1215.

 

Am just curious as to why this law is never really mentioned in anyway i watched on youtube a very intresting court arguement

 

part 1

part 2

 

Has anyone on this thread attempted this arguement or have they been locked up for doing so?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering if anyone knows if this law applies in Scotland

It doesn't actually apply to England in this way never mind Scotland. The charter itself has in reality been implicitly mainly repealed by later statute and common law. Not suprisingly, as the law tends to reflect modern circumstances rather than those of the 13th century. For example the English church ceased to be free of the crown in the 16th century, with Forest Law disappearing sometime before that and feudal incidents (with which the charter is most concerned) were abolished by the statute of Charles II in 1660.

 

That aside, chapter 61 is about the rights of barons. There is nothing in the charter corresponding to the rights of an individual vis-a-vis the crown.

 

As far as refusing to pay any tax, etc. is concerned you will go directly to jail, you will not pass GO and you will not collect your £200.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...